A judgment entered against debtor by the probate court as a result of his conduct as a personal representative was non-dischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(4). The financial harm to the probate estate was caused by debtor's defalcation as a fiduciary.

The court denied an application for administrative expense by a lessor of personal property. The lessor had terminated the leases pre-petition, although it did not take possession of the property, and should not be rewarded for sitting on its rights

A collection agency was monetarily sanctioned for violating the automatic stay by refusing to acknowledge the bankruptcy, threatening criminal prosecution, and withdrawing funds after coercing debtors into revealing bank account information.

To prevail on a motion to intervene under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2), movant must show a timely filed motion, a direct & substantial interest, potential impairment of that interest, and lack of adequate representation of that interest by existing parties

Too many questions of fact existed for the court to grant summary judgment on the issue of whether the debtor's corporate officers could be held personally liable for the debtor's failure to make required contributions to its employees' ERISA plans.

Debtor, anticipating a distribution from the estate of her deceased father, moved to dismiss her bankruptcy case to pay creditors independently. The court denied debtor's motion to avoid prejudicial delay of payment or a reordering of priorities.

The right to object to discharge under 11 U.S.C. section 523 is not assignable. Standing under section 523 appears to be limited to the creditors who have suffered harm because of the debtor's actions, and not simply any willing buyer

Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment granted in part; discusses Rooker-Feldman doctrine, res judicata, finality of arbitration award and judgment, Section 523(a)(4) defalcation by fiduciary, and Section 523(a)(6)

U.S. Trustee's section 707(b) motion to dismiss for substantial abuse was denied because debtors' housing expense wasn't excessive under the particular circumstances of this case, and because debtor's 401(k) contributions are necessary for future support

Creditor provided doors for debtor's residence and took security interest in doors & house. That "additional collateral" allowed debtor to modify creditor's rights by extending repayment beyond contract date, because § 1322(b)(2) doesn't apply.